← Library
Madras High CourtWP/289/2018disposed of

B.Ravikumar, v. Inspector Of Police,

2018-01-08Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:08.01.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No.289 of 2018 B.Ravikumar ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Inspector of Police, Tirupur South Police Station, Tirupur District.

2. The Regional Transport Officer, Kumr Nagar, Avinashi Road, Tirupur (North) - 641 603 ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent herein to return the petitioner's Driving License bearing DL No. TN-28-20050000567 forthwith. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ganesan For Respondents : Mr.D.Suryanarayanan, Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

Mr.D.Suryanarayanan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents and by consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent herein to return his Driving License bearing No. TN29-20000000394 forthwith.

3. It is seen that the petitioner is a driver in N.R.T. Bus Company, Palladam. While he was driving the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-42-P-0225 from Kovai to Tirupur jon 15.12.2017, the vehicle met with an accident, pursuant to which, a criminal case was registered in Crime No.1017/2017 by the 1st

respondent police. It is contended by the petitioner that the seizure of the license and retaining the same is erroneous merely because the criminal case was registered against the petitioner in respect of an accident. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his contention relied on the decision reported in 2010 Writ L.R. 100 (P.Sethuram vs. The Licensing Authority, The Regional Transport Officer, The Regional Transport Office, Dindigul) and a single Judge decision made in W.P.No.16958/2013 dated 01.07.2013 reported in 2013 Writ L.R.843 (S.Duraivelu vs. The Regional Transport Officer, West Thambaram, Chennai & 2 others).

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the license of the petitioner was seized since an accident had taken place on 15.12.2017 while the petitioner was driving the vehicle.

5. Heard both sides.

6. It is seen that the petitioner's driving license was seized pursuant to the accident that had taken place on 15.12.2017 followed by the registration of the criminal case. It is further seen that even in respect of the cases where the license were suspended, this Court in the above referred cases, has held that the authorities are not entitled to suspend the license merely because the criminal case is registered against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get back the license, however, with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to return the driving license of the petitioner immediately on receipt of a copy of this order. However, it shall not preclude the second respondent from initiating any action, if any of the contingencies specified in Clauses (a) to (h) of Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, arises later or if any of the Rules as prescribed by the Central Government in pursuance of Section 19(1)(f) of the Act, are violated. No costs.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vsi To

1. The Inspector of Police, Mecheri Police Station, Mecheri, Salem District.

2. The Regional Transport Officer, Mettur, Salem District.

+1cc to Mr.A.Ganesan, Advocate, S.R.No.1424 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.1442 W.P.No.289 of 2018 CS/12/01/18